RE: Review of draft-ietf-dime-load-07

[Roni Even <[e-mail]>]

Hi Steve,
Thanks, I have no more comments
Roni

> -----Original Message-----
> From: ietf [mailto:[e-mail]] On Behalf Of Steve Donovan
> Sent: יום ג 07 מרץ 2017 17:45
> To: [e-mail]
> Subject: Re: Review of draft-ietf-dime-load-07
> 
> Roni,
> 
> Thank you for your review.  Please see my comments inline.
> 
> Steve
> 
> On 2/23/17 3:01 AM, Roni Even wrote:
> > Reviewer: Roni Even
> > Review result: Ready with Nits
> >
> > I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The General Area
> > Review Team (Gen-ART) reviews all IETF documents being processed by
> > the IESG for the IETF Chair.  Please treat these comments just like
> > any other last call comments.
> >
> > For more information, please see the FAQ at
> >
> > <https://trac.ietf.org/trac/gen/wiki/GenArtfaq>.
> >
> > Document: draft-ietf-dime-load-07
> > Reviewer: Roni Even
> > Review Date: 2017-02-23
> > IETF LC End Date: 2017-02-27
> > IESG Telechat date: 2017-03-16
> >
> > Summary: This draft is almost ready for publication as a standard
> > track RFC
> >
> > Major issues:
> >
> > Minor issues:
> >
> > I understand that each node can calculate the load differently , the
> > example in figure 8 demonstrate that the agent selection may be
> > different if the agent aggregates load from the servers to calculate
> > its load or just conveys his load, possibly even that each one of the
> > agents will use different method. Why not mandate load calculation
> > using aggregated weighted loads?
> SRD> The working group thought it was best to leave this as an
> implementation decision.
> >
> > Nits/editorial comments:
> > 1. In section 5 paragraph 9 "The load report includes a value
> > indicating the load of the sending
> >     node relative load of the sending node, " should be just "The load
> > report includes a value indicating the relative load of the sending
> > node,"
> SRD> Yes, change made.
> > 2. In section 6.2 "weigth "
> SRD> Change made.
> > 3. in the security consideration what about an endpoint in the middle
> > changing the host load value causing a change in the routing
> > decisions.
> SRD> I'm assuming that you mean an agent in the middle changing the host
> value.  I've added the following to the security considerations section
> -- "Given that routing decisions are impacted by load information, there is
> potential for negative impacts on a Diameter network caused by erroneous
> or malicious load reports. This includes the malicious changing of load values
> by Diameter Agents."
> >
> >
> >
> >